MariaDB: Packagers needed

Adam Williamson awilliam at redhat.com
Tue Oct 30 01:08:06 UTC 2012


On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 02:03 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> 
> Am 30.10.2012 01:58, schrieb Adam Williamson:
> > On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 01:20 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> >>> Well, we could also take the approach we take with MTAs; have a set of
> >>> generic virtual Provides for MySQL-alikes and have all the MySQL-alikes
> >>> we package Provide these, as well as Providing their own specific name,
> >>> and conflict with each other. Just like postfix, qmail and sendmail all
> >>> Provide: smtpd and conflict with each other.
> >>
> >> you can not compare a more or less standalone MTA with a package
> >> like mysql-libs where endless packages linked against!
> > 
> > I didn't compare anything. I suggested that the _mechanism_ we use in
> > that case may also be appropriate in that case _if_ the circumstances
> > merited it. I explicitly stated that I didn't know whether the
> > circumstances actually do make it a sensible choice. I just floated the
> > possibility.
> > 
> > I do wish you'd read with a bit more subtlety sometimes, Harald
> 
> don't get me wrong but where is subtlety necessary here?
> 
> * mysql-libs is a widely used and linked library
> * postfix/sendmail/exim is a binary with alternative symlinks
> 
> different worlds
> different implications

You're entirely missing the point.

I suggested a *packaging mechanism* that we use in another situation.
Not a policy. The mechanism of having 'virtual provides' which multiple
packages can each satisfy is proven to be an effective way of coping
with a situation where multiple packages can provide a given function. I
suggested that it could be used _if_ this case matches that description.
Just because I mentioned sendmail and I mentioned mysql does not mean I
am 'comparing' them.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net



More information about the devel mailing list